[woodpanel]

Whenever someone tells me about the "nordic blessings" I tell them to "junte" the "law" up.

Smaller, more homogenic countries compare badly to more populated heterogenic ones.

Also: norway's oil example holds up since the once poorer than Swedes Norse outperformed the Swedes because of this. 1-2 generations earlier, "nordicly blessed" Norse were the house maids and guest workers for the Swedes. Nowadays it's Swedish students doing Norway's dishes.

Also Sweden maybe high rated in terms of social mobility, but only until the highest income percentiles are reached. Above that it's way way harder to reach compared to other first world countries. So while you can climb up more easily than normal the social latter, it's steps mean less than normal and you'll almost never make it into Sweden's 1%. A category that is the most open in the US of A.

[zond]

Because in the US of A it is so very easy.

[woodpanel]

Of course not easy. But doable compared to Sweden. You have to look at the statistics. The top Swedish percentile is made up more than normal of inherited wealth (48% in Sweden, 12% in the US). The US doesn't have a Wallenberg family that owns 42% of the country's stocks.

[zond]

Of course you're right, but it doesn't mean anything.

It's like saying that you should buy people lottery tickets instead of healthcare.

I once heard that the US citizens most vehemently against raising taxes for the rich were the homeless, because they didn't want THEIR taxes raised once THEY became rich.